Jeopardy Computer Watson Heads to Final Chapter

Last year, writer Stephen Baker approached Houghton Mifflin Harcourt with an idea for a book about an IBM computer designed to compete against humans on Jeopardy! “I said, ‘There’s going to be a big match in January 2011 and we should really hurry and get a book out by September,” Baker recalled. “They said, ‘Forget it.’”

The publishing house said the story would be old news by the time Baker’s book was published. Instead, HMH suggested Baker report and write everything but the final chapter before the match taped so the book could be in stores the day after it aired on television. The result, “Final Jeopardy: Man vs. Machine and the Quest to Know Everything,” will go on sale in hardcover tomorrow. E-book readers, meanwhile, have been able to buy the book already; the final chapter will be beamed to them tomorrow.

Speakeasy talked with Baker about the publishing experiment.

The Wall Street Journal: How did the unorthodox production schedule influence your reporting and writing?

I had the first 10 months of the year to report 11/12ths of the book. We had to have magazine-type deadlines -– the first three chapters by now, the next three chapters by then. You’re working on rewriting chapters one through three, while reporting chapter seven and writing chapter six. We get all the stuff done by November 15th and edited by December 1st. The match was taped on January 14th and the following weekend I wrote the final chapter.

If the last chapter is going out to e-book readers electronically, couldn’t you fiddle up until the final minutes?

It’s still tied to the manufacturing and distributing process of paper because Barnes & Noble said, okay, we’ll go with this partial e-book for the Nook on the condition that you have the paper book in the stores the next day.

You published an earlier book in a more traditional fashion. Did you enjoy working this way?

I don’t expect to do a slow book again. I think this is going to be the way books are done -– in a much more timely schedule. Book authors are going to have to be faster and tied to the news in the way that magazine writers traditionally have been.

Isn’t one of the strengths of books the contemplation time they afford to writers?

Ideally, yes, you get a woman like the one who wrote “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.” She spent eight years on that book. It’s a richly reported thing and it benefits from all the gestation. But for every book like that there are many others that have long gestation periods that don’t sell very well, that can’t get space on the shelves, that don’t get media attention and can’t really finance themselves. A certain number of lucky authors or ones with a brand can say to Random House, ‘I’m going to take four years and will come back with something you’re glad I spent four years on.’ But that’s a tiny minority.

Did it matter to you if the computer, Watson, won or lost the Jeopardy match?

It doesn’t matter in terms of the march of this technology. For me, personally, I wanted Watson to win –- both because I knew the team and had worked with the team closely and consider Watson to be a human endeavor. But also I think my book will do better if it’s about a machine that triumphs. People might say, gee, machines are really going to change our world. What do they do and how did they build this thing?

Has there been a downside to the process?

This galley is much more typo-ridden than the galley for my previous book, “The Numerati.” That book went through one or two more rounds of copyediting before the galley. This galley is down and dirty.

Readers, what do you think of how Watson has performed so far? Leave your thoughts in the comments.

About Speakeasy

Speakeasy is a blog covering media, entertainment, celebrity and the arts. The publication is produced by Barbara Chai and Jonathan Welsh with contributions from the Wall Street Journal staff and others. Write to us at speakeasy@wsj.com or follow us on Twitter at @WSJSpeakeasy or individually @barbarachai.